Design change for Keith

Re: Design change for Keith #2

Dick Hines

>Here is another angle.

Re: Design change for Keith

Keith Tompkinsd

>Hi Dick, thanks for posting.....this is an excellent opportunity to show two different approaches to design.

Let me say that this IS an attractive piece, I'm not too sure I would have left the remnants of the neck; it might look good without it also.

This appproach worked for you, and many other turners use this approach with great success.However, there are problems when one relys solely on this approach.

First, I teach woodturning, and most of the students are at the beginning stage. I cannot tell them to mount a piece on the lathe, and then tell them "let the wood talk to you". They need guidance, an understanding of good vs. bad form, a sense of proportion, balance, and technique all at the same time. I can dramatically alter the learning curve by teaching form and technique together. After they have an understanding of the basics, they may have the ability to explore a bit.

From my own personal standpoint, design changes are not an option. The pieces I make are either part of a series, an order from a gallery, or a show piece. Sometimes I must make several pieces of the same design...in that case, design change is out of the question.

When I turn, I approach the lathe with a goal ( a whole different post). Since I already have done my homework, and am happy with my design, I am able to devote all my energy to creating the piece. If the wood on the lathe isn't working, it's goin' in the wood stove...as the Donald would say "You're Fired!"

What is YOUR approach.....Thanks for the photos Dick.

Re: Design change for Keith

Dick Hines

>Keth, I marvel a anyone who can make two pieces that even come close to looking the same. I frend asked me to do legs for a bed he was making. How did that wrk out? Not to good! I tie trout flies and out of the thousands no 2 ever are the same. I wish I could turn two pieces alike. I tru but they just don'twok out.

To each his own.

Different approaches

Bob Hackett

>As you know,I teach too.One of the things I stress in my classes is that you must remain flexible.I joke with students that if someone tells you there is only one right way to do something then you need to run to the door at that point.Like most good humor,there is some sound advice buried in it.

Perhaps we are too wrapped up in our own brand of "art speak" when we say"I listen to the wood"or "I let the wood speak to me",etc.

To me that means nothing more than A-careful assessment of the log prior to chainsawing,B-once the blank is mounted,cutting away everything I can`t or don`t want to deal with,and C-my willingness to take a different direction if I find something unexpected buried within the blank.

That different direction may be to stop and coat the blank and leave it for another day or the direction may be the woodstove.I find more and more of the "failed" pieces are being used as teaching aids rather than heat.

I understand the need for different wood types for different pieces.After years of experimentation I`ve come to accept that you need to choose wisely and work from a body of knowledge if you want any piece to be assured of success.

Right now your work tends toward the sculptural.I`m assuming you choose the wood blanks for thier predicatabilty in regard to grain and maybe the wood type was chosen for it`s ability to carve easily and hold detail well.Most of the turners persuing more sculptural,off the lathe(the lathe becomes almost secondary) type pieces seem to be moving toward wood like that.

Christian Burchard chooses Madrone burl for his basket pieces for it`s distortion while drying. Madrone does not grow in Maine so those of us who seek this same natural texture substitute local woods such as oak and lilac.

Ron Kent chooses Norfolk pine for it`s translucense as does Peter Bloch.If either of them had not been open to the idea of using spalted wood then thier work would tend toward being monotone and be far less interesting.

While working things like burls and stumps(two of my favorites) require careful planning in the preparation of the blank you still have to be open to change as things such as inclusions,rot and voids appear while turning.

This is not to say that I don`t hold some blanks to my ear for hours at a time or don`t meditate over the ones too large to lift.

Thus far I have yet to hear any of them say anything other than "thanks" when I put that first coat of finish on.That`s something I hear with my eyes more than my ears though.

When someone smiles when they see my work,when they light up as they lift it,I know I`ve listened well.

Mainely,Bob

Re: Design change for Keith

Arch

>Hi Keith, Thanks for your reassuring comments on teaching woodturning. I have long advocated emphasizing "form, proportion and balance" along with technique from the beginning. It's good to have a recognized teacher-artist like you promote this approach. It seems to me that excessive training on technique at the expense of design at the onset often made us int good artisans who now have great difficulty becoming good artists.

In no way do I denigrate craftmanship or tools and their proper usage. It's just that pretty soon in our turning journeys our questions and commentary re a turned piece end up being about the elements of good design that make for acceptable art.

We are a very diverse group and many will argue that proper technique is the foundation of woodturning. True, but I wonder if overbuilding the foundation can adversely affect building the superstructure? IOW, why not include design before we are frozen into technique. I wish I could make what I want to say, clearer.

Turn to Safety, Arch

Technique and design

Bob Hackett

>If you don`t teach design along with technique then at the end of the course you end up with a student who can turn ugly forms more quickly.

What`s the sense in that?

Mainely,Bob

Re: Design change for Keith

Keith Tompkinsd

>Hi Dick,

I think the secret to repetitive turning is practice, and of course, technique.

If you were to study with a production turner, you would see the techniques he uses on an everyday basis. They become second nature over time. With practice, you would be duplicating work with little measuring.

Sometimes people may marvel at a piece of work; they don't see the other end of the story, the hours and hours of solitude one spends perfecting their craft.

I built furniture pieces and chairs for years directly from drawings and blueprints. that has certainly affected the way I turn. Once I have the plan for a piece, I don't deviate from that plan.......We stick to how we learn something, and it's not easy to change..I can see where this could also be a deterrent to my own creative process in many instances.

Re: Different approaches

Keith Tompkinsd

>Well said, Bob.

You are correct,I search carefully for the piece of wood in advance. If I find an unexpected void,I have a problem. Another turner may see the void and pronounce "Wow, I love this!".

I have a problem with voids and bark inclusions, and I have difficulty turning pieces with these "defects". Something left over from my perfectionist furniture days.....yet, I admire and even envy the dramatic pieces that other turners create by taking advantage of those same defects.

Are both approaches to our craft valid? Certainly, that's one of the reasons turning is so much fun.......ps I would sure enjoy one of your classes!

Re: Design change for Keith

Keith Tompkins

>Arch, I think you got your point across.

I think the lack of interest in form really becomes apparent during a stroll through some of the instant galleries and at club meetings.

I see forms that are enhanced by every technique immaginable, burning, piercing, texturing, segmenting, whatever, yet none of those things can overcome the fact that the size of the chuck determined what the piece looks like! Or the turner allowed the initial size of the block of wood to determine the form.

Bob's take is right-on regarding that IMHO. We should study form and technique together.